Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T15:02:13.009Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Camera tracking and qualitative airflow assessment of a two-turn erect spin

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2016

R. I. Hoff  and
G. B. Gratton
R. I. Hoff*
Affiliation:
Brunel Flight Safety Laboratory, School of Engineering and Design, Brunel University, Uxbridge, UK
G. B. Gratton*
Affiliation:
Brunel Flight Safety Laboratory, School of Engineering and Design, Brunel University, Uxbridge, UK
*
rein.hoff@brunel.ac.uk
guy.gratton@brunel.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Motion and airflow during a two-turn erect spin of an aerobatic light aeroplane have been analysed. An alternative method, based upon camera tracking, has been used to capture the spin motion. A CAD model of the Slingsby Firefly was created using laser scanning. Formation flights with a helicopter have been flown and high-quality video and still imagery obtained. Camera tracking has produced data and unique illustrations of the spinning Slingsby. To further investigate the aerodynamic flow of a spinning aeroplane, full-scale, flow visualisation flights have been flown using wool tufts on wing, fuselage and empennage. Tufts indicate that a large vortex forms on the outside wing. The spanwise motion of this vortex has been studied and related to the spin motion. Furthermore, tufts on the horizontal tail indicate the presence of a leading edge vortex with the flow mainly in a spanwise outwards direction. The effects observed are clearly three dimensional and time dependent. Finally, it is discussed how this new knowledge does not correspond with the spin theories of the past.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 116 , Issue 1179 , May 2012 , pp. 541 - 562
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2012 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Neumann, H. Drooped leading edge, Flight test evaluation with a small general aviation airplane, 2006, SETP European Symposium, Dresden, Germany.Google Scholar
2. Philipp, H. Bailout during spin tests, 2006, SETP European Symposium, Dresden, Germany.Google Scholar
3. Defence Standard 00-970 Part 1, Section 3, Issue 2, Leaflet 18, Spinning and Spin Recovery, Design Criteria for Spin Resistance and Spin Recovery, December 1999.Google Scholar
4. Finn, E. Analysis of routine tests of monoplanes in the Royal Aircraft Establishment Free Spinning Tunnel, June 1937, Report No BA 1409.Google Scholar
5. Bowman, J.S. Summary of spin technology as related to light general-aviation airplanes, December 1971, NASA TN D-6575, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
6. Burk, S.M., Bowman, J.S. and White, W.L. Spin-tunnel investigation of the spinning characteristics of typical single-engine general aviation airplane designs. I — Low-wing model A: Effects of tail configurations, September 1977, NASA Technical Paper 1009.Google Scholar
7. Bowman, J.S., Hultberg, R.S. and Martin, C.A. Measurements of pressures on the tail and aft fuselage of an airplane model during rotary motions at spin attitudes, 1989, NASA Technical Paper 2939.Google Scholar
8. Stewart, E.C., Suit, W.T., Moul, T.M. and Brown, P.W. Spin tests of a single-engine, high-wing light airplane, January 1982, NASA Technical Paper 1927, Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, USA.Google Scholar
9. Stough, H.P., Patton, J.M. and Sliwa, S.M. Flight investigation of the effect of tail configuration on stall, spin, and recovery characteristics of a low-wing general aviation research airplane, October 1986, NASA Technical Paper 2644, Langley, VA, USA.Google Scholar
10. Stough, H.P., DiCarlo, D.J. and Patton, J.M. Flight investigation of stall, spin, and recovery characteristics of a low-wing, single-engine T-tail light airplane, October 1985, NASA Technical Paper 2427, Langley VA, USA.Google Scholar
11. Englert, S. Lancair Columbia 400 Spin Recovery Testing, 2005, SETP Symposium, LA, USA.Google Scholar
12. The Slingsby T67M200 Pilots Notes, incorporating the CAA approved flight manual, August 1985, Slingsby Aviation, UK.Google Scholar
13. Leica HDS 6000 Scanner, http://hds.leica-geosystems.com/en/HDS-Laser-Scanners-SW_5570.htm (Retrieved 11/01/11).Google Scholar
14. Leica Cyclone 6.0, http://hds.leica-geosystems.com/en/Leica-Cyclone_6515.htm (Retrieved 11/01/11).Google Scholar
15. 3Dreshaper 5.2, http://www.3dreshaper.com/en1/En_PointCloudProcess.htm (Retrieved 11/01/11).Google Scholar
16. Panasonic, Operating Instructions, Memory card Camera-Recorder, Model No AG-HPX500, DVCProHD, 2007, Matsushita Electric Industrial Co.Google Scholar
17. Kenyon Laboratories, http://www.ken-lab.com/stabilizers.html (Retrieved 21/11/11).Google Scholar
18. Pentax, SLR Digital Camera, K20D, 2008, Operating Manual, Pentax Corporation.Google Scholar
19. Syntheyes 64-Bit Version 2008.1.1028, 2009 Andersson Technologies.Google Scholar
20. Autodesk 3ds Max 2011, 2010, Autodesk.Google Scholar
21. Jones, B.M. and Haslam, J.A.G. Airflow about stalled and spinning aeroplanes shown by cinematographic records of the movements of wool-tufts, August 1932, Aeronautical Research Committee, T.3291.Google Scholar
22. Brown, A.P., Dillon, J., Craig, G. and Erdos, R. Flight manoeuvre and spin characteristics of the Harvard Mk 4: Application to human factors flight research, 16-19 August 2004, AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference and Exhibition, Providence, Rhode Island, 2004-4815.Google Scholar
23. Sony, Handycam HDR-CX105, 2009, Sony Corporation.Google Scholar
24. JVC Everio G, Hard Disk Camcorder, GZ-MG840BE, HDD, 2008, Victor Company of Japan.Google Scholar
25. Muvi Micro DV Camcorder, http://www.veho-uk.com/main/index.aspx (Retrieved 7/02/11).Google Scholar